GUNAVANT GOVIND KATHE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellant convicted for murder of his wife under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to life imprisonment has preferred this appeal challenging the order of conviction and sentence.

(2.) THE prosecution case leading to the conviction of the appellant is as follows:- THE incident had taken place on the night between 17/11/1991 and 18/11/1991 at the residential house of the appellant in Harijanwada in village Bordi, Taluka Dahanu, Dist:thane. THE appellant was married to deceased Lalita about 6 to 7 years before the date of incident. THE couple had no issue and were residing separately in one part of their family house, the other portion being occupied by the appellant's mother who was residing with her husband's sister while the appellant's brother Dinesh, the complainant, PW 1 was residing with his family in the adjoining portion called "padvi". THE brother of the deceased was residing in Vasai in the same district. On 12th November, 1991 the couple had been to the house of Lalita's brother in Vasai. THEy returned home on 17th November 1991 at about 7.30 in the evening. Late in the night the mother of the appellant heard shouts from the portion of the house of the appellant and, therefore, asked her elder son Dinesh, the complainant to intervene. When the complainant went to the portion of the house in occupation of the appellant, he found Lalita was lying on the ground with numerous injuries on her neck and was bleeding while the appellant was stabbing himself with a knife in his hand. He, therefore, snatched away the knife from the hand of the appellant and threw it away. THE appellant then collapsed on the ground and became unconscious. THE complainant informed the Deputy Sarpanch Hirubhai Patel about the incident. THE Deputy Sarpanch accompanied by the complainant went to the Gholwad police outpost in an auto-rickshaw and informed the police about the incident. THE police from Gholwad police outpost came to the house of the appellant when they found Lalita dead and the appellant unconscious. A tempo was arranged and both of them were taken to Dahanu Cottage Hospital where the appellant was admitted as an indoor patient. Dinesh, the brother of the appellant went to Dahanu Police Station and lodged his F. I. R. Exhibit 14, on the basis of which the offence was registered under C. R. No. I-163/91 and the investigation was commenced. After drawing inquest panchanama Exhibit 7 the dead body was sent for post-mortem. THE police went to the house of the appellant and drew the panchanama of the scene of offence which is Exhibit-16. A blood stained knife found at the place of offence was seized under the said panchanama. THE appellant was indoor patient until 29th December 1991 and he was arrested on 30th December, 1991 and produced before JMFC, Dahanu on 31st December, 1991. As the appellant showed his willingness and readiness to make confessional statement, the JMFC gave the requisite warning to the appellant that if he made confessional statement it would be used against him and that he was not bound to make confessional statement. THE appellant was then remanded to magisterial custody till 2nd January 1992. THE appellant was then produced before the learned Magistrate on 3rd January 1992 on which date, after ascertaining and ensuring that the appellant voluntarily wanted to make confessional statement, his confessional statement was recorded. THE clothes of the deceased which were blood stained were also sent to C. A. for chemical analysis. Similarly, the blood of the appellant was collected and was sent for chemical analysis to C. A. After the investigation was completed, chargesheet was filed on 9/3/1992 for the offences punishable under Section 302 and Section 309 of Indian Penal Code.

(3.) WE are not impressed by any of the contentions raised on behalf of the appellant. There is no doubt that there is no eye witness to the incident of assault on the deceased and the case is based on the circumstantial evidence. The Trial court had noted the following circumstances: (i)Deceased Lalita had met with homicidal death. (ii)The deceased was lastly seen together with the appellant and they alone were in the room in which the deceased was found dead. (iii)The appellant was found attempting to commit suicide in the same room where the deceased was lying dead. (iv)The knife found at the scene of offence was stained with blood group of the deceased. (v)The confessional statement made by the appellant before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, which is Exhibit 24